By Allen Kolmes
Something I have not yet heard discussed when the topic is the ever-more-rapidly increasing redistribution of wealth into the hands of the already wealthy--
Currently, five percent of the U.S. population owns 70% of the nations wealth. Theoretically, at least, it follows that 70% of the nation's economic activity goes to the care and feeding of that 5% of the population.* And then it also follows that a proportional amount of the nation's entrepreneurial activity will also be devoted to catering to the needs and desires of 5% of us.
No sense wasting time and money creating something that would benefit oh, say, most of the population. Why bother. Those people don't have much money anyway. Plus, it is difficult to compete for the dollars of people who are spending their money on things like, um, necessities.
OK,no doubt some of the great things invented on behalf of the megawealthy will someday benefit everybody else as well. But emblematic, I'm sure, of future trends, is the Virgin Atlantic Space Plane. At $200,000 a ride, it will give corporate CEOs even more incentive to fuck over their workers, shareholders, and suppliers to be able to afford a trip on that baby.**
Based purely on economic incentives, whom are you the brilliant designer going to design handbags for--the ladies that summer in the Hamptons, or the ladies that serve them their burgers at the local 5 Guys? Are you the world-class engineer going to work on a better city bus when the real money is in yachts? And are you, the math genius, going to work on statistical models to figure out how the world's food supply can be better distributed, or are you going to work on ways to make the investment vehicles you are selling too imcomprehensible for even the most intelligent federal regulator to decipher?
And, so, a prediction for the future--look for our economy to put a lot more effort into inventing and producing stuff that people don't need, and a lot less effort into creating and making stuff that people could really use.
*I know--that figure is bound to be off. Rich people tend to save more of their money rather than spend it, a lot of the income of the wealthy goes to taxes, blah blah blah. But even if the real figure is WAY different--maybe it's as low as 50%--my argument is no less valid
**to be fair, if Wikipedia is to be believed, Richard Branson sounds like a pretty good guy.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Sunday, October 3, 2010
TEA PARTIERS AS IEDs
by Allen Kolmes
Many moons ago I waxed wistfully about the (im)possibility of the Tea Partiers somehow being neutralized by an army of equally batshit liberals. As expected, that has not happened.
So what else can be done to stop the flood of dangerous incoherence coming from the TP (great initials!). Certainly not reasoned argument. This is a crowd who has as a central plank in their platform the concept that the POTUS is a neofascist crypto-muslim Luo tribesman. Their argument style originated with George Bush's proclamation that the fact that the U.N weapons inspectors never found WMDs somehow constituted proof that Hussein in fact had them.
Current use of that logic--Obama's birth certificate proves that he is lying about his origins.
There may be an opportunity here...like maybe if the NY Times editorial page started yelling "taxes suck," maybe the TPers would reflexively start yelling "taxes good." Right.
Then I realized--this is a group whose heads are about to explode. This observation comes both from hearing their pronouncements in the media, and from observing their behavior firsthand at a town hall meeting last summer.
What if we could somehow make their heads actually detonate?
So help me out here. What can we say or do to a TPer to make their intracranial pressure exceed the resistance of their substantial skulls? Please submit ideas.
A few suggestions:
Announce that we should socialize arms production.
Agree to eliminate Social Security--as long as we also eliminate the Department of Defense
Announce that cars and trucks should be taxed per cylinder.
Tell them that Obamacare provides funding for illegal aliens to get in vitro fertilization.
Then duck and cover.
Many moons ago I waxed wistfully about the (im)possibility of the Tea Partiers somehow being neutralized by an army of equally batshit liberals. As expected, that has not happened.
So what else can be done to stop the flood of dangerous incoherence coming from the TP (great initials!). Certainly not reasoned argument. This is a crowd who has as a central plank in their platform the concept that the POTUS is a neofascist crypto-muslim Luo tribesman. Their argument style originated with George Bush's proclamation that the fact that the U.N weapons inspectors never found WMDs somehow constituted proof that Hussein in fact had them.
Current use of that logic--Obama's birth certificate proves that he is lying about his origins.
There may be an opportunity here...like maybe if the NY Times editorial page started yelling "taxes suck," maybe the TPers would reflexively start yelling "taxes good." Right.
Then I realized--this is a group whose heads are about to explode. This observation comes both from hearing their pronouncements in the media, and from observing their behavior firsthand at a town hall meeting last summer.
What if we could somehow make their heads actually detonate?
So help me out here. What can we say or do to a TPer to make their intracranial pressure exceed the resistance of their substantial skulls? Please submit ideas.
A few suggestions:
Announce that we should socialize arms production.
Agree to eliminate Social Security--as long as we also eliminate the Department of Defense
Announce that cars and trucks should be taxed per cylinder.
Tell them that Obamacare provides funding for illegal aliens to get in vitro fertilization.
Then duck and cover.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
IT'S MY MONEY, DAMMIT!
Pet Peeve #2: People Who Claim That Taxes Are Taking Away My Money
by Allen Kolmes
This claim makes a lot of superficial sense. After all, the money is essentially (if sometimes infinitesimally briefly) in the possesion of the person who earned it before it is forcibly removed (withholding) or semivoluntarily relinquished (payments) and sent to the government.
Where this claim goes seriously wrong lies in the fact that one's money is not earned in a vacuum. One's money is earned working in partnership with the system.
Take my own situation. I work hard, using skills that took me many many many years to perfect. And I am compensated very well for it.
But I am not the one solely responsible for my having acquired those skills. All of my education took place in taxpayer supported institutions. A significant portion of my knowledge was originially learned by scientists working with public support. Half of the insurance payments that ultimately make it into my paycheck is provided by the government. The hospitals I work in are safe and functional places to work because of government regulations and their enforcement. The roads I drive on to get to work were built by the government. Etc., etc. Without the government, my job would not exist. So, yeah, I feel I inherently owe part of the money I make to the entity that makes it possible
by Allen Kolmes
This claim makes a lot of superficial sense. After all, the money is essentially (if sometimes infinitesimally briefly) in the possesion of the person who earned it before it is forcibly removed (withholding) or semivoluntarily relinquished (payments) and sent to the government.
Where this claim goes seriously wrong lies in the fact that one's money is not earned in a vacuum. One's money is earned working in partnership with the system.
Take my own situation. I work hard, using skills that took me many many many years to perfect. And I am compensated very well for it.
But I am not the one solely responsible for my having acquired those skills. All of my education took place in taxpayer supported institutions. A significant portion of my knowledge was originially learned by scientists working with public support. Half of the insurance payments that ultimately make it into my paycheck is provided by the government. The hospitals I work in are safe and functional places to work because of government regulations and their enforcement. The roads I drive on to get to work were built by the government. Etc., etc. Without the government, my job would not exist. So, yeah, I feel I inherently owe part of the money I make to the entity that makes it possible
We Get Whiny, For a Change
By Allen Kolmes
Epic has decided that we have not been nearly whiny enough. After all, the midterms are practically upon us! And all we have had to offer is positive, upbeat, solutions-based material.
So it is clearly time to start whining.
And in that spirit, we at Epic (actually, just me, Allen Kolmes--I don't dare tell RFB or he'll out whine the
s#&t out of us) proudly announce a new series--Pet Peeves!
Pet Peeve #1--People Who Complain That Politicians Are All (pick one or many): negative campaigners, flip-floppers, afraid to tell the truth, whores, hypocrites, etc., etc....
People complain about politicians as if they are some sort of subhuman subspecies--some horribly uniquely inately corrupt, hypocritical, morally ambiguous subspecies created by Satan to inflict themselves upon us otherwise good people.
Bollocks! The above adjectives no doubt do apply to members of the political class. But this is not the result of faulty hard wiring. Nope. Politicians are in fact homo sapiens just like the rest of us, and at the stem cell stage no different than future, say, fashion designers and auto mechanics. What they are is proof that evolution does occur.
Because the political process is totally Darwinian. The system selects for certain behaviors. It selects for negative campaigning, because that's what gets votes. It selects for telling voters what they want to hear--even saying two contradictory things to two different audiences, because that's what voters want to hear. It selects for people who don't tell the truth when telling the truth will lose votes, because voters vote against politicians who tell them what they don't want to hear. It selects for people who provide simplistic explanations to complex problem, because voters don't want to think too hard. It selects for people who preach to voters what they already believe, because voters don't want to even consider ever changing their mind. It selects for people who distort the facts, because voters don't want to take the trouble to research the truth. It selects for people who will do whatever it takes to get money, because voters respond to advertising.
So who is to blame for the lousy politicians we get? (Hint for Sarah Palin fans: NOT the politicians.)
There is a word for politicians who don't pander, tell the truth, refuse to run negative campaign ads, and don't accept donations from special interests in return for future favors:
LOSERS.
So stop complaining about how crappy our politicians are and start complaining about how crappy our voters are. Get over the fact that Meg Whitman employed an illegal alien, or that Jerry Brown shtupped a rock star to whom he was not married while on safari while governor . Research their policy positions, instead. If you don't like something a politician says, at least be willing to consider the possibility that they are right and you are wrong. If an issue sounds too easy to understand, it probably is--learn the nuances of it. And fight to get the special interest money out of politics by pushing for public financing of election campaigns. And maybe, just maybe...our politicians will suck a little bit less.
Epic has decided that we have not been nearly whiny enough. After all, the midterms are practically upon us! And all we have had to offer is positive, upbeat, solutions-based material.
So it is clearly time to start whining.
And in that spirit, we at Epic (actually, just me, Allen Kolmes--I don't dare tell RFB or he'll out whine the
s#&t out of us) proudly announce a new series--Pet Peeves!
Pet Peeve #1--People Who Complain That Politicians Are All (pick one or many): negative campaigners, flip-floppers, afraid to tell the truth, whores, hypocrites, etc., etc....
People complain about politicians as if they are some sort of subhuman subspecies--some horribly uniquely inately corrupt, hypocritical, morally ambiguous subspecies created by Satan to inflict themselves upon us otherwise good people.
Bollocks! The above adjectives no doubt do apply to members of the political class. But this is not the result of faulty hard wiring. Nope. Politicians are in fact homo sapiens just like the rest of us, and at the stem cell stage no different than future, say, fashion designers and auto mechanics. What they are is proof that evolution does occur.
Because the political process is totally Darwinian. The system selects for certain behaviors. It selects for negative campaigning, because that's what gets votes. It selects for telling voters what they want to hear--even saying two contradictory things to two different audiences, because that's what voters want to hear. It selects for people who don't tell the truth when telling the truth will lose votes, because voters vote against politicians who tell them what they don't want to hear. It selects for people who provide simplistic explanations to complex problem, because voters don't want to think too hard. It selects for people who preach to voters what they already believe, because voters don't want to even consider ever changing their mind. It selects for people who distort the facts, because voters don't want to take the trouble to research the truth. It selects for people who will do whatever it takes to get money, because voters respond to advertising.
So who is to blame for the lousy politicians we get? (Hint for Sarah Palin fans: NOT the politicians.)
There is a word for politicians who don't pander, tell the truth, refuse to run negative campaign ads, and don't accept donations from special interests in return for future favors:
LOSERS.
So stop complaining about how crappy our politicians are and start complaining about how crappy our voters are. Get over the fact that Meg Whitman employed an illegal alien, or that Jerry Brown shtupped a rock star to whom he was not married while on safari while governor . Research their policy positions, instead. If you don't like something a politician says, at least be willing to consider the possibility that they are right and you are wrong. If an issue sounds too easy to understand, it probably is--learn the nuances of it. And fight to get the special interest money out of politics by pushing for public financing of election campaigns. And maybe, just maybe...our politicians will suck a little bit less.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
The First Ever Epic Name-That-Party Contest!
By Allen Kolmes and RFB
We have actually come to an agreement on something! We have decided that we need a new political party, one that stands for what the people really want, and we need it now.
ALLEN: I have a theory about people who call themselves conservatives. I believe that a significant proportion of them (I'm guessing half) are to conservatism what Larry Craig and Ted Haggard are to heterosexuality--that deep down inside they are actually self-loathing progressives who actually like government-provided stuff such as the CIA, the Immigration and Naturalization Sevice, Social Security, Medicare, our kick-ass military, education for everybody, the police, the Border Patrol, the National Park Service, freeways, airports, GPS, the Coast Guard, firefighters, , satellite TV, the FDIC, the Internet, NASA, heck, maybe even the EPA.
What causes them to suppress this love that dare-not speak its name? That's easy. They hate paying for it.
The rest of self-described conservatives? They are the True Believers. They really do want government spending cut back. As long as it does not affect them personally.
RUSH FAN BOY: As for the liberals, they are happy to admit they love all that government stuff (well, maybe not Guantanamo or the Materials Management Agency). And yes, they are all agreed, we should raise taxes to pay for it. Let's raise taxes on people who do really yucky things, like smokers. Or SUV drivers. Or BP.
Too bad we can't tax terrorism. How cool would that be!
And, of course, on the rich. And you can count on this--all liberals define "rich" as "richer than me."
Double taxes for rich terrorists who smoke. Triple if their diet consists of more than 50% trans fats and corn syrup. Quadruple if they drive a Hummer.
RFB and ALLEN: So, roughly 50% of conservatives and at least 50% of liberals--which adds up to nearly 100% of everybody--are, deep down in their hearts, in favor of government programs but against paying for them. Unfortunately, we have a two-party system in which one party professes to be in favor of cutting spending and cutting taxes, and the other proposing that we increase spending and increase taxes.
What we need is a party whose stated goals are what people actually want. Pro-government assistance (to themselves, at least), anti-taxation. Pro-environment, anti-doing anything about it. Pro-guns, anti-shooting at people. In favor of a strong defense, even more in favor of strong offense, against anybody actually getting hurt, pro passing the tab on to the grandkids.
So ask yourself the following questions:
Do you want the government to keep its hands off your Medicare, your Social Security, and your paycheck?
Are you worried about the impact that the deficit will have on our grandchildren, but not enough that you would give up your premium cable channels?
Are you really really bummed out about the oil-covered pelicans in the Gulf, but not so bummed that you would trade in your Escalade for a Mini Cooper to prevent it from happening again?
If you, like the vast majority of your fellow Americans, can honestly answer "yes" to any of these questions, then join us. The best part--no need to be an activist! What we are for is what is already happening anyway! We're just not afraid to admit it, unlike those other parties.
But we need some help here--branding is crucial, and we just haven't been able to find a name for our new party. Best we could come up with is the "We Want It All But Don't Want To Pay For It" party. Doesn't exactly light up the focus groups.
So, given the enthusiastic...ok, tepid...ok nonexistent, response to our art contest, it is with great pride that Epic announces its first ever name-a-new-political party contest! Winners will be announced...when somebody actually enters. First prize--a credit card application.
We have actually come to an agreement on something! We have decided that we need a new political party, one that stands for what the people really want, and we need it now.
ALLEN: I have a theory about people who call themselves conservatives. I believe that a significant proportion of them (I'm guessing half) are to conservatism what Larry Craig and Ted Haggard are to heterosexuality--that deep down inside they are actually self-loathing progressives who actually like government-provided stuff such as the CIA, the Immigration and Naturalization Sevice, Social Security, Medicare, our kick-ass military, education for everybody, the police, the Border Patrol, the National Park Service, freeways, airports, GPS, the Coast Guard, firefighters, , satellite TV, the FDIC, the Internet, NASA, heck, maybe even the EPA.
What causes them to suppress this love that dare-not speak its name? That's easy. They hate paying for it.
The rest of self-described conservatives? They are the True Believers. They really do want government spending cut back. As long as it does not affect them personally.
RUSH FAN BOY: As for the liberals, they are happy to admit they love all that government stuff (well, maybe not Guantanamo or the Materials Management Agency). And yes, they are all agreed, we should raise taxes to pay for it. Let's raise taxes on people who do really yucky things, like smokers. Or SUV drivers. Or BP.
Too bad we can't tax terrorism. How cool would that be!
And, of course, on the rich. And you can count on this--all liberals define "rich" as "richer than me."
Double taxes for rich terrorists who smoke. Triple if their diet consists of more than 50% trans fats and corn syrup. Quadruple if they drive a Hummer.
RFB and ALLEN: So, roughly 50% of conservatives and at least 50% of liberals--which adds up to nearly 100% of everybody--are, deep down in their hearts, in favor of government programs but against paying for them. Unfortunately, we have a two-party system in which one party professes to be in favor of cutting spending and cutting taxes, and the other proposing that we increase spending and increase taxes.
What we need is a party whose stated goals are what people actually want. Pro-government assistance (to themselves, at least), anti-taxation. Pro-environment, anti-doing anything about it. Pro-guns, anti-shooting at people. In favor of a strong defense, even more in favor of strong offense, against anybody actually getting hurt, pro passing the tab on to the grandkids.
So ask yourself the following questions:
Do you want the government to keep its hands off your Medicare, your Social Security, and your paycheck?
Are you worried about the impact that the deficit will have on our grandchildren, but not enough that you would give up your premium cable channels?
Are you really really bummed out about the oil-covered pelicans in the Gulf, but not so bummed that you would trade in your Escalade for a Mini Cooper to prevent it from happening again?
If you, like the vast majority of your fellow Americans, can honestly answer "yes" to any of these questions, then join us. The best part--no need to be an activist! What we are for is what is already happening anyway! We're just not afraid to admit it, unlike those other parties.
But we need some help here--branding is crucial, and we just haven't been able to find a name for our new party. Best we could come up with is the "We Want It All But Don't Want To Pay For It" party. Doesn't exactly light up the focus groups.
So, given the enthusiastic...ok, tepid...ok nonexistent, response to our art contest, it is with great pride that Epic announces its first ever name-a-new-political party contest! Winners will be announced...when somebody actually enters. First prize--a credit card application.
Monday, June 14, 2010
THE BEST TRAVEL ADVICE EVER!
By Bob McKay
Here is the some of the best travel advice you will ever receive:
When you are lost--anywhere--the place to ask for directions is...the pizza place.
Feel free to quit here.You have received 98% of the wisdom provided in this post.
For further details about the evolution of this brilliant concept, read on.
So, last month my wife and I were driving to a hotel on the outskirts of Rome. Armed with Mapquest directions and my uncanny homing skills, our arriving successfully was destined to be a slam-dunk.
Until we realized that Mapquest is completely useless in Italy.
"Bear right at Il Corso di Lasagna (0.4 km)
5th right atVia di Victorio Emmanuelle d'Bennedetto Garibaldi-(1.8 km)
Bear just slightly left at Piazza Benito Mussolini il Batardo--5.4 km"
If you get the first 3 turns correct, you are a brilliant navigator, or lucky. But eventually, you are destined to lose it, because, a) None of these streets actually have street signs b) there are no real intersections in Italy, just roundabouts and splits in the road and c) If your rental Lancia does have a trip odometer, you are afraid to look for it for fear of pressing the wrong button
So it was that we were hopelessly lost. According to the paper from the hotel's website, the hotel was in Lazio. So we stopped and asked somebody where Lazio was. She helpfully pointed straight ahead. Turns out that was like being lost in the Valley and asking somebody where Los Angeles County is.
Next try--stop at the first open place of business, which happened to be a pizzeria. I named the name of the street. The delivery man knew right where it was--despite its being 2 blocks long and 5 miles away--and in fact happened to be heading that way to make a delivery. It was as he led us to our hotel that it dawned on me-every pizza guy in the entire world knows every street within their delivery radius. So...Lost? Go to the pizza place. Lost, and hungry? Even better.
And if you must use Mapquest, at least ask the agent at the car rental desk where the trip odometer is.
Here is the some of the best travel advice you will ever receive:
When you are lost--anywhere--the place to ask for directions is...the pizza place.
Feel free to quit here.You have received 98% of the wisdom provided in this post.
For further details about the evolution of this brilliant concept, read on.
So, last month my wife and I were driving to a hotel on the outskirts of Rome. Armed with Mapquest directions and my uncanny homing skills, our arriving successfully was destined to be a slam-dunk.
Until we realized that Mapquest is completely useless in Italy.
"Bear right at Il Corso di Lasagna (0.4 km)
5th right atVia di Victorio Emmanuelle d'Bennedetto Garibaldi-(1.8 km)
Bear just slightly left at Piazza Benito Mussolini il Batardo--5.4 km"
If you get the first 3 turns correct, you are a brilliant navigator, or lucky. But eventually, you are destined to lose it, because, a) None of these streets actually have street signs b) there are no real intersections in Italy, just roundabouts and splits in the road and c) If your rental Lancia does have a trip odometer, you are afraid to look for it for fear of pressing the wrong button
So it was that we were hopelessly lost. According to the paper from the hotel's website, the hotel was in Lazio. So we stopped and asked somebody where Lazio was. She helpfully pointed straight ahead. Turns out that was like being lost in the Valley and asking somebody where Los Angeles County is.
Next try--stop at the first open place of business, which happened to be a pizzeria. I named the name of the street. The delivery man knew right where it was--despite its being 2 blocks long and 5 miles away--and in fact happened to be heading that way to make a delivery. It was as he led us to our hotel that it dawned on me-every pizza guy in the entire world knows every street within their delivery radius. So...Lost? Go to the pizza place. Lost, and hungry? Even better.
And if you must use Mapquest, at least ask the agent at the car rental desk where the trip odometer is.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Announcing the First Ever Epic Art Contest
by RFB
Twice a week, on average, I make a midday 40 minute drive between hospitals. I spend that time seeking enlightenment by listening to talk radio.(Actually, half of that time; the other half is spent listening to commercials). Most days, I leave around one. My choices are then either Michael Medved, or Sean Hannity. Occasionally, however, I get a pre-noon start. On those blessed days, I am able to listen to The Great One, the King...RUSH!
I have already written quite a bit about why Rush Limbaugh is the greatest thing ever to pick up a microphone. One thing I have yet to discuss is the unique insightfulness of his listeners.
For instance, back in September an astute caller provided a look at yet another inevitable downside of insuring the uninsured that I have yet to hear or see anywhere else:
"You talked about the side effects of this health care coverage... when you insure all of these people...they will utilize emergency rooms and they will utilize other health care facilities more than they do now. The only thing deterring them from using these things too much is the fact that they know they'll be responsible for paying for it. So when somebody doesn't want to go to work Monday morning because they're too tired or too hung over from the weekend, they'll go to their doctor's office and ask for a note, and we wind up spending more money on health care than we would if we didn't do this."
So having 40 million or so uninsured people is actually good for the economy. It makes society more productive by forcing lazy people with hangovers to go to work rather than getting a doctor's excuse to call in sick, and it saves on healthcare costs. I know, liberals will probably whine that they can't even get a same-day doctor's appointment on a Monday morning. Why do liberals hate the greatest healthcare system in the world? Because they hate freedom.
Then this past Tuesday, this gem:
"CALLER: I have felt since January that every day President Obama pulls out a waterboard, straps me onto it, raised my head back and pours some wave of something over my head to make me feel like I am drowning in hopelessness... He's strapping individual citizens in this United States to that waterboard every day and pouring water over our heads to make us feel like we're going to drown.
RUSH: I actually like the analogy. We're being tortured. We're being tortured with the fear of hopelessness to control our lives.
CALLER: That's exactly it. It's a daily waterboarding. So I would love one of your fabulous artists to design this and show President Obama pouring water over a citizen every day...
RUSH: You know, we have a great graphic artist at RushLimbaugh.com."
So this masterpiece came to be:
OK, I have to call Rush on something here. He said "we're being tortured." He must have misspoke, for he knows as well as anybody that waterboarding is not torture. It is enhanced interrogation.
That got me to thinking. If the Obama era is like constantly being waterboarded, what was the Bush era like?
I know! It was like one long Thai massage, with multiple happy endings!
Lowering my taxes a lot, lowering less affluent people's taxes just a little...oh baby! Getting out a can of whoopass in Afghanistan..here it comes again! Another can of whoopass in Iraq...better close your eyes, George, or they might get wet and sticky! Privatizing Social Security...
OK, so that last one was more like handjobus interruptus.
But anyway, I'm not much of an artist. But hopefully one of my five or so readers is, so I would like someone to come up with a graphic of our own, one that fondly depicts W as a Thai masseur. The winner will have the very great honor of having his or her work posted right here on Epic! Congrats in advance!
Twice a week, on average, I make a midday 40 minute drive between hospitals. I spend that time seeking enlightenment by listening to talk radio.(Actually, half of that time; the other half is spent listening to commercials). Most days, I leave around one. My choices are then either Michael Medved, or Sean Hannity. Occasionally, however, I get a pre-noon start. On those blessed days, I am able to listen to The Great One, the King...RUSH!
I have already written quite a bit about why Rush Limbaugh is the greatest thing ever to pick up a microphone. One thing I have yet to discuss is the unique insightfulness of his listeners.
For instance, back in September an astute caller provided a look at yet another inevitable downside of insuring the uninsured that I have yet to hear or see anywhere else:
"You talked about the side effects of this health care coverage... when you insure all of these people...they will utilize emergency rooms and they will utilize other health care facilities more than they do now. The only thing deterring them from using these things too much is the fact that they know they'll be responsible for paying for it. So when somebody doesn't want to go to work Monday morning because they're too tired or too hung over from the weekend, they'll go to their doctor's office and ask for a note, and we wind up spending more money on health care than we would if we didn't do this."
So having 40 million or so uninsured people is actually good for the economy. It makes society more productive by forcing lazy people with hangovers to go to work rather than getting a doctor's excuse to call in sick, and it saves on healthcare costs. I know, liberals will probably whine that they can't even get a same-day doctor's appointment on a Monday morning. Why do liberals hate the greatest healthcare system in the world? Because they hate freedom.
Then this past Tuesday, this gem:
"CALLER: I have felt since January that every day President Obama pulls out a waterboard, straps me onto it, raised my head back and pours some wave of something over my head to make me feel like I am drowning in hopelessness... He's strapping individual citizens in this United States to that waterboard every day and pouring water over our heads to make us feel like we're going to drown.
RUSH: I actually like the analogy. We're being tortured. We're being tortured with the fear of hopelessness to control our lives.
CALLER: That's exactly it. It's a daily waterboarding. So I would love one of your fabulous artists to design this and show President Obama pouring water over a citizen every day...
RUSH: You know, we have a great graphic artist at RushLimbaugh.com."
So this masterpiece came to be:
OK, I have to call Rush on something here. He said "we're being tortured." He must have misspoke, for he knows as well as anybody that waterboarding is not torture. It is enhanced interrogation.
That got me to thinking. If the Obama era is like constantly being waterboarded, what was the Bush era like?
I know! It was like one long Thai massage, with multiple happy endings!
Lowering my taxes a lot, lowering less affluent people's taxes just a little...oh baby! Getting out a can of whoopass in Afghanistan..here it comes again! Another can of whoopass in Iraq...better close your eyes, George, or they might get wet and sticky! Privatizing Social Security...
OK, so that last one was more like handjobus interruptus.
But anyway, I'm not much of an artist. But hopefully one of my five or so readers is, so I would like someone to come up with a graphic of our own, one that fondly depicts W as a Thai masseur. The winner will have the very great honor of having his or her work posted right here on Epic! Congrats in advance!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)